Jump to content


Panther II Package adjustment


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

Dr Luigi Phd #1 Posted 05 March 2014 - 06:41 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Supertester
  • 434
  • Member since:
    10-15-2013

I got to looking at the Panther II and the E-50 and comparing it to the similarities of the Panther vs Panther II and I think that the short L/56 8.8cm cannon should be removed from the Panther II. If you were to move the L71 8.8cm cannon off the last optional package and instead bring down the L/100 8.8cm for the last optional package on the Panther II, I think it would fit much better into the Sniper/Flanker role it was designed for.

 

I am opening this up for a friendly debate and would like to hear some different opinions.



Matthew J35U5 #2 Posted 05 March 2014 - 06:44 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 7,531
  • Member since:
    09-09-2013

View PostDr Luigi Phd, on 05 March 2014 - 01:41 PM, said:

I got to looking at the Panther II and the E-50 and comparing it to the similarities of the Panther vs Panther II and I think that the short L/56 8.8cm cannon should be removed from the Panther II. If you were to move the L71 8.8cm cannon off the last optional package and instead bring down the L/100 8.8cm for the last optional package on the Panther II, I think it would fit much better into the Sniper/Flanker role it was designed for.

 

I am opening this up for a friendly debate and would like to hear some different opinions.

I disagree that the 88L/100 is necessary for the Panther II, the 88L/71 is good enough. I would remove the 88L/56 and replace it in its package with the 75L/100 though. 

 

Edit—Because if you want to use the 75L/100 over the 88L/71 you can't with the current configuration.


Edited by Matthew J35U5, 05 March 2014 - 06:45 PM.


Dr Luigi Phd #3 Posted 05 March 2014 - 07:10 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Supertester
  • 434
  • Member since:
    10-15-2013
What if they were to add another optional package after the L71 with a slightly bigger engine and the L100 8.8? It would give tier 8 a taste of what the E-50 and E-50M are like.


Matthew J35U5 #4 Posted 05 March 2014 - 07:25 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 7,531
  • Member since:
    09-09-2013

But why does the Panther II need the 88L/100 when the Pershing is getting by with the 90 mm gun with 180 penetration? I mean, i suppose it would make some sense because the 88L/100 is kind of worthless on the E50* but I'm feeling kind of sorry for the Pershing with everyone passing it by with their super-high-penetration guns.

 

*In the sense that once you get the 105L/52 the 88L/100 is pretty much just obsolete. 



Dr Luigi Phd #5 Posted 05 March 2014 - 07:47 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Supertester
  • 434
  • Member since:
    10-15-2013
If you remember, the point of this was to find a gun to replace the L71 if it got moved to replece the L56. I just think it does so little damage at tier 8 especially when placed in tier 9 and 10 games that it should at least have greater penetration. It would also make the E-50 grind more gentle





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users